SHAHID ALI Vs. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard.

(2.) The learned counsel for the respondent No.2 had filed a complaint before the Court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Raipur against the petitioners praying for taking cognizance of offences under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471 and 120 B read with Section 34 of I.P.C. The learned trial Court completed the inquiry on the complaint under Section 200 of Cr.P.C. pursuant to which the order dated 07.11.2013 was passed. The trial Court refused to entertain the complaint and to take cognizance of offences on this ground that the Court at Raipur does not have jurisdiction and the jurisdiction is available with Bilaspur Court.

(3.) The Criminal Revision No.510 of 2013 was preferred before the Court of th Additional Sessions Judge, Raipur, C.G. and the same has been decided by the impugned order by which the order of the A.C.J.M., Raipur dated 07.11.2013 was set aside and the trial Court was directed to consider whether the cognizance can be taken or not in the complaint case. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicants were respondents in the revision petition No.510 of 2013 before the Court of 6th Additional Sessions Judge, Raipur, C.G. but before passing the impugned order, no notices were issued to them, therefore, they were not provided with the opportunity of hearing which is against the principle of natural Justice. Making a reference to the Section 401 (2) of Cr.P.C., that ''no order shall be made to the prejudice of the accused or other person unless he has had an opportunity of being heard either personally or by pleader in his own defence.''